Subject:
|
Re: Liberalism: "Trojan-horse fascism without the jackboots"? [was What has to be the worst...]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 Mar 2003 15:39:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
236 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
<snip>
>
> This story made it to the Guardian front page today:
>
> Thousands of Americans want to oust their president. The anti-war one, that is
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,907070,00.html
> ==+==
> NBC is under pressure to sack him from its hit show or face a boycott or
> withdrawal of advertising. Sheen said in Los Angeles the channel's executives
> had indicated that his high profile could damage the show and had called on him
> to explain his views. He had also received thousands of hate emails, been
> accused of being a traitor and accosted in the street.
>
> Many actors and singers are being lambasted by conservative talk show hosts for
> expressing their opposition to the war. A website, Citizens Against Celebrity
> Pundits, has been launched, for "American citizens [who] stand against wealthy
> Hollywood celebrities abusing their status to speak for us".
>
> The site calls for donations for ads to counter the anti-war movement. "We
> believe that celebrities Martin Sheen, Mike Farrell, Tim Robbins, Rob Reiner,
> Barbra Streisand and others with them are using their celebrity to interfere
> with the defence of our country," says the site.
> ==+==
Was on CNN.com yesterday, basically saying the same thing in the article above
http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/TV/03/03/sheen.antiwar.ap/index.html
But this one has a quotation from the NBC spokesperson:
"
But NBC spokeswoman Rebecca Marks told The Associated Press on Sunday that
she knows of "no concern among top management at NBC regarding Mr. Sheen's
stand against the war or fear that it could impact the show."
"
What is the truth? I would surmise that there are concerns in the upper
echelons of NBC over Martin Sheen's stance and participation in the anti-war
movement, but money talks--West Wing is still taking in viewers--it hasn't
lost me yet.
>
> I found myself thinking “the liberal-American-media strikes again”. Deeper
> inside the paper I found further evidence:
<snip>
Here's the thing--telling people to shut up? Protesting against people's
right to protest--actors or no? "Let's set up a website to tell those
Hollywood blowhards that we don't like them speaking for us!"
Well, the Hollywood actors aren't speaking for you, but that's 'small
fish'--here's the big guns--
I think all of these folks who are so upset about Martin Sheen should also
boycott and talk trash about Bruce, Arnold, and Jean Claude (and all the
other actors that have a 'pro-war' stance! But they won't 'cause 'those'
Hollywood types are saying what they want to hear.
Again I ask where do we draw the line on peoples right to speak up for their
beliefs? Why can conservative radio talk show hosts say that the "Hollywood
Leftists" should be "Pro-American" (who says they aren't) and that they (the
Hollywood actors against the war) should not speak their political views? (1)
I think that anyone who tries to make their point by telling the other side
to shut up and take a seat is "Un-American". (2)
>
> Scott A
Dave K
1 - I'm not saying that you have to like the actor, the movies/shows they've
been in, or anything else about them--you have to respect their right to
have a view and the right to express that view, just as they must give you
the same respect. Not only is that respect protected by the 1st for
*everyone* in the United States, it allows a dialogue to take place.
Stifling dialogue = no growth and understanding, respecting dialogue =
growth and further understanding for *all* parties.
2 - shut up and take a seat being in the form of "We don't like what you're
saying solely because it goes against what we believe--Therefore you should
stay quiet."
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | shut up and take a seat
|
| (...) You mean like what Jacques Chirac told the new Europeans the other day? (URL) is not well brought up behavior," Mr. Chirac said. "They missed a good opportunity to keep quiet." (21 years ago, 4-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
